Civil Unions as a viable option? Bah, I saw one of those Yes on 1 commercials even saying “Oh we want to be tolerant, see – here are civil unions for the Gays! See? We’re not bigots!’ Yeah… Washington State is a great example of how accepting they are of Civil Unions, right? Yes it passed (and good for them!) but why is there a voice in the back of my head saying ‘The Fundies will come after us, whether it’s marriage or Civil Unions, or Domestic Partnerships, or whatever 2nd-class separate-and-unequal bullshit we wanna call it now?’

At this point I’m not much better emotionally than I was last night – today found myself feeling incredibly resentful toward my straight friends… it didn’t matter that they supported Marriage Equality; all that mattered was they COULD get married, and I COULDN’T get married, and there were nearly 250k people in Maine who were just fine with that. Hell, I live in Oklahoma, Land of Sally Kern and Gays-can-fix-my-hair-but-not-have-rights BS, but Maine’s pain is my own right now.

I’ll be happy for the victories we DID get soon enough… and I’ll be very thankful for the 200k people in Maine who DO support me and my wish to marry soon enough… right now I just have this awful dread in the pit of my stomach about what’s coming.

Love to all and smoochies! *staggers off to bed*

The same applies to gay marriages. They are not generally recognized outside of the borders of the state that granted them. Fact is that marriage is a loser for gay people. We’ve lost 31 of 31 votes. We’ve won a few votes on civil unions, though.

Until every state and country on earth recognizes civil unions that are not by name marriage, good luck getting anyone agree to that since it merely confines them to a few select places where such unions exist.

@terrwill “What we need to do is mimic the Washington situation across the country. To be perfectley honest I don’t give two shits about the term “marriage”. I want the exact same rights and benefits that straight couples are entitled to and enjoy.”

The problem with that is that other states and the federal government won’t necessarily grant you the same rights unless you have “marriage”. Or is all you care about the rights you get in the state you live in?

Well, you can start with the Roman’s attitude towards it, which during the republic was that it was OK to be a top, but not so good to be a bottom, unless the bottom was a slave or had a very low social status relative to the top. Naturally, this would have been pretty unpopular among the slaves. As the empire degraded, attitudes about sex in general became more uptight – everyone needed something to blame – and this was well before the Christians had any control. The Christians, meanwhile, found it easiest to recruit from those on the bottom of the social structure, and strong beliefs against homosexuality would probably have been attractive to people like straight slaves forced to be bottoms by their owners. Then all it takes is a positive feedback loop and you are off and running.

Olson and Boise, we ought to hang their portraits up in our homes when they, at the federal level, bring and end to this equality fight once and for all. It’s the only way. Democratic Presidents can appoint fair minded Supreme Court Justices, but gays need to bug the sh*t out of Washington and support the Equal Rights Foundation, Olson and Boise, and let the Constitution work for us. We’ve got a good case here!
Today was one of the lowest days I’ve had in this fight for gay rights.

http://www.equalrightsfoundation.org/

Queerty, shine some light on this, it’s a rallying point.

Yeah? Well, the same “saccharine” advertising produced a victory for civil unions out here in Washington State. At the moment, the count is 51%-49% in our favor, but King County (which includes Seattle) is only 23% counted as I write on Wednesday morning, so when it’s all said and done we’ll probably have the same 53-47% result as in Maine but the other way around.

Washington State is very much like Maine socially, but not quite as poor. We have two Democratic senators and a Democratic governor at the moment, but it’s been otherwise here in the relatively recent past.

Maybe it is time for gay people to realize that the M-word is a loser, and that we ought to be pushing for civil unions.

I previously posted statistics showing that 16% of Maine’s population has no religion. Given that, you’d expect at least 32% to consist of people who may belong to a church but attend sporadically, mostly on Easter or Christmas, or who attend merely to accompany a spouse, but don’t take it seriously. That gets you to 48% of the population. Then you can add maybe 33% who are religious but who view voting as a civil responsibility as the main reason for showing up. That gets you to 81%. There aren’t enough people left for Brian’s 2:1 margin to be plausible.

Brian produced no citation at all, but even in a state where “the majority of citizens cite religion as unimportant in their lives,” he blames religion anyway. He must think “religion” has some supernatural power – even where it is marginalized by most of the populace, it still determines the outcome according to Brian.

What’s wrong with this picture? :-)

1EqualityUSA, you have a point in regard to the tax exempt privilege enjoyed by religious cults. None of them are supposed to be endorsing any particular candidate but they get around the law by telling their followers to vote for those who support their views. I’ve been advocating for removal of tax exemption for all cults that meddle directly or indirectly in the political process. Why should they be above the law and dictate who is entitled to this or that right? Maybe they need to be taught a lesson, a dose of their own hate medicine coming from our camp for a change starting with the tax-exemption issue.

When we did deep into the numbers we discover that the majority of Americans believe in equality, including ours. But, we’re not reaching out to those people and asking for their help. Instead, we play political games and “demand” rights. We need to figure out how to get that majority to stand up for equality.

HRC, LAMBDA, GLAAD, NGLTF and others are NOT DOING THAT. In fact, nobody is. That’s our problem. As a community we continue to expect “somebody else,” like the organizations I mentioned, to do our work. It’s pretty clear after 30-40 years that they can’t or won’t.

The LGBT Community really needs a comprehensive strategy to obtain equality. We are NOT making progress when our fellow citizens keep voting against us.

The LGBT Community has never won a popular vote for same-sex marriage. Same Sex marriage is “Banned” in 41 States. The States that have same-sex marriage did it legislatively or with the help of the Courts. We don’t have a single “victory” when the people get to vote. Plus, there is DOMA.

We lose to religion because they have an army and we don’t. The exit polls will show that the rallying call to stop same-sex marriage was made in the 1,500 churches across the State. They made it an important issue and they came out to vote.

While only 48% of Maine residents make religion “important,” we did not and do not have a way to inspire a response like the churches. While half the population of Maine is probably fair enough to put equality before religion, they didn’t come out like the religious crowd did.

We must figure out how to create our own army of people willing to respond to the call for equality. Until the, religion will continue to rally their troops and seal our fate.

-Larry-
aka lordlnyc

Brian, religion most definitely was at the root of our defeat as it was in California. Its been the primary instigator of homophobia for more than 2 millenia, look at its vile history around the world. These cults, primarly the roman cult are the culprits for perpetuating institutionalized homophobia. Nothing has changed that much to the present day. In this country it has grown stronger, more powerful because none of the politicians in both major parties are prepared to take them on, unlike other more progressive countries. Our problem is that we’re badly organized, not focused and not united with one national spokesperson to lead us. We need some of the zealotry the opposition adopts and look how successful they’ve been. Two states defeated, not a huge track record though, considering we have five already on board.

Still, we have to look at New Jersey. Apparently, Corzine’s defeat doesn’t signify the end of marriage equality. He indicated some weeks ago that he would get it passed during a lame duck session saying that the votes are there. Lets hope that happens and then on to New York, we may get a positive vote as early as November 10, lets hope that too happens. If we get two more gains, its going to put a dent in the opposition. Every little bit helps.

Which is exactly the sort of candidate we should have been supporting, but since she doesn’t have a D by her name she’s poison to us gays and a pariah to so-called “true conservatives” who want rule or ruin and as a result stuck NY-23 with an anti-Same-sex marriage Democrat. But I’m sure HRC is happy about getting another Democrat in office.

Our army is not “the Democrats.” It has to simply be people who believe in equality and will stand with us. We have never tried to do that. We have never tried to organize our own army – made up of people who believe in fairness.

People won’t “come out” for us, until we “come out” for ourselves.

Goes to prove all vile poo these scumbags are spewing about “getting back to traditional values” are being rejected even by the moderate repubs. Virgnia only the last election got somewhat blue, so going red wasn’t that much of a suprise. As far as New Jersey Corizine lost because of the skyrocketing taxes in that state. Most voters polled stated moral “values” had nothing to do with their voting for Chunky Christy but rather dollar “values” So while the RWNBZs can boast how “the tide has turned” they are as usual only preaching to the choir and that choir is singing a tired old tune that the majority of Americans are tired of hearing……

Exit Poll data is coming.

It’s not that Democracy cannot work, it’s just that things like human rights and judicial decisions should never be made by referendum. It’s the equivalent of throwing an accused person to the lynch mob.

There is a reason why the British and American systems have three branches of government to balance one another. Ironically taking every cause celebre to a referendum actually works against the spirit of democracy by tying the hands of the elected government and the courts.

And, as in this case and many others, it results in some very bad decisions.

Its the same reason/resolution Plato offers for the eminent failure of Democracy in his “Republic.” He suggests a “Philosopher-King” is best for all. Good policies take effect fast without the delay of bureaucratic nonsense. Its a system I much favor and no he didn’t mean for idealists like Hitler to have seized power. He meant someone along the lines of ancient Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

If we are guaranteed the exact same rights and benefits as straight couples and can create our own ceremonies which truly reflect our unique relationships rather than a scripted tired old marriage ceremony like a bad high school play what is the loss there?

“Just as the nation could not endure half slave and half free but eventually had to go all one way or all the other, we will not be able to get by with a situation in which some couples are married in one state, not married when they move to or travel through the next, and married again when they reach a third.
If same sex marriage is legally recognized in a small number of states, it will spread throughout the nation, either through judicial action under the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause or by the working of informal cultural pressures. Some states – Utah would be one – may try to hold out, but sooner or later they will be whipped into line.”
–Robert P. George, Chairman,
National Organization for Marriage,
speaking at Brigham Young University,
October 28, 2008

http://video.google.com/videos.....#038;emb=0

If 100 thousand absentee ballots have not been counted yet they can completely turn around this result.

Does anyone know whether these votes have already been counted or have not been counted and will be counted seperately?

@ #88
I hear your frustration, but you know we can’t just take away peoples’ gay passports that way. The fact is we have just as many people who are lazy, bigoted, and have politics we disagree with as there are in the general public.

The only difference is most people in the general public only imagine that criminals and foreigners can be excluded from their exclusive club. They may disagree with other people, but they have to accept they are human beings with just as much right to speak.

It’s galling, but we have to do the same, and deal with it. The people who couldn’t be bothered to act ARE part of our community, and we ARE fighting for their rights.

If the rightwing-nutbag zealots want to claim the term “marriage” let them have it. The Gay unions I have attended where the couple basically create the ceremony to reflect their own relationship have been ten times more moving, inspiring, and heartfelt than any marriage ceremony I have attended in a church or temple. The argument these rightwing-nutbag zealots use is that they don’t wish to deny us rights but object to the term “marriage” due to religious connotations. And if they are able to deny us our rights thru continued success in legiislative and ballot mearures we will face an insurmountable battle. The success of Washington is the key. If we can get everyting but a simple term “marriage” let them have it. There will be those who will argue that we are then second class citizens. If we are entitled to every right and benefit as straight couples, can create our own ceremonies that cater to our relationships, why then fight for an institution which is based on cultures and beliefs that spread hate towards us? Again let them have the term, give us the rights…………….